time to refuel the gm

[Mr. Body]

Dallas shot its wad with the Kidd trade, even if they get Diop back. Kidd is done.

I expect Dallas and Phoenix both to miss the playoffs, while the Spurs qualify in the lower half of the order.

Kidd doesn't need to be more than a generous quarterback. The season will depend as always on Dirk and the Dirketeers. Kidd won't be playing Paul every night and still has enough to waste most of the PGs in the league.

[Marcus Bryant]

The athletic big coming in is young, green, and unproven. You have to assume he is better than expected, and has a flat learning curve. That is just blind hope.

Mahinmi is a little bit better talent than that. The Spurs are moving to a style which certainly fits his skill set.

So the Spurs are supposedly doomed because they haven't prepared by drafting young, long, athletic talent, but when they are bringing in that talent, then there's yet something else wrong with it, as if all young athletic talent that the Spurs could bring in would be polished and ready to play championship basketball.

Given the Spurs draft history in the past five years, assuming that the #26 and #45 picks will amount to anything is likewise blind hope.

Spurs were drafting international talent that could stay abroad for a while before they figured out what to do with it. Now they are drafting for a contributor next season.

Given the players available in the free agent class, assuming the Spurs will acquire anything more than a fringe contributor is blind hope.

We'll see. Since they are looking to rebuild the supporting cast rather than maintain, I think they'll be a little more aggressive in free agency this summer.

Meanwhile, there still will be four players over the age of 35 expected to play major roles, and the member of the Big 3 who was completely gassed in the playoffs, and whose effectiveness is most tied to his energy level, is going to log heavy Olympic minutes for Argentina. Oh, and the E-N reporter in charge of relaying official Spurs spin already shared with us that the Spurs expect big things from the corpse of Michael Finley to spell said Big 3 exhausted player.

Doubtful. Between the draft and free agency they will find some swingman talent, as the focus is now not on maintaining but regenerating the supporting cast. The Spurs have done rather well in the Duncan Era rebuilding an ineffective supporting cast when it looked like everything was lost.

Really, thoughts of contention next season rely almost exclusively on blind hope.

Best-case scenario is that my guess of 48 wins is too optimistic, and they fall further down the standings and get a better draft pick in '09... oh, wait, they already gave away that pick.

Really, the best chances at championships are already past. The window may get pried back open a little bit for the '10-'11 season, but for the next two years the Spurs are just playoff fodder.

Oh yes, it's all over. The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. Rinse. Repeat.

[Extra Stout]

Mahinmi is a little bit better talent than that. The Spurs are moving to a style which certainly fits his skill set.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/amir_johnson/index.html

So the Spurs are supposedly doomed because they haven't prepared by drafting young, long, athletic talent, but when they are bringing in that talent, then there's yet something else wrong with it, as if all young athletic talent that the Spurs could bring in would be polished and ready to play championship basketball.

Please make up your mind. You can't simultaneously make excuses for why Ian Mahinmi won't be ready to play championship basketball in '08-'09 and then claim him as a reason the Spurs should be able to contend for a championship in '08-'09.

Spurs were drafting international talent that could stay abroad for a while before they figured out what to do with it. Now they are drafting for a contributor next season.

The Spurs aren't particularly adept at scouting domestic talent.

We'll see. Since they are looking to rebuild the supporting cast rather than maintain, I think they'll be a little more aggressive in free agency this summer.

The free agent class is not good. They can't acquire players in free agency that aren't free agents.

Doubtful. Between the draft and free agency they will find some swingman talent, as the focus is now not on maintaining but regenerating the supporting cast. The Spurs have done rather well in the Duncan Era rebuilding an ineffective supporting cast when it looked like everything was lost.

That was five years ago. What they succeeded in doing then, they are failing to do now.

Oh yes, it's all over. The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. Rinse. Repeat.

The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. They will be first- or second-round playoff fodder for the next two years before another possible contending run or two.

[Twisted_Dawg]

no gm thought scola would rebound like he did
had ming been more healthy scola would not have seen as many minutes and not put up as good as stats

Apparently the Houston GM did.

[Twisted_Dawg]

For those of you who say Holt is a cheap ass owner.....wasn't he prepared to offer Jason Kidd a mega contract in 2003 on the foolish advice of the Buford & Popovich?

[angelbelow]

Bad moves.
Steve Smith(HITA), Rasho, S Jackson, Going after Kidd, Splitter, Elson, Scola
Hedon't, trading Barbosa, not recognizing to draft J Howard, resigning Bonner, not making any big moves that help the team with all star talent with trades in over 10 years.

a lot of these are justifable my man (unless youre a woman in which i apologize for calling you a man) but this is how it breaks down.

Steve Smith-we had ginobili coming up, we had stephen jackson coming up. unless youre talking about trading for him, because anderson wasnt going to beat out ginobili or sjax for playing time anyways.

Rasho-its true it was a mistake, but it was a calculated one, rasho was coming off a promising season 11 pts 1.5blks 6.5 rebs and he didnt do bad his first year here. 8.7pts, 2 blks, 7.7rebs. besides as soon as we realized he was no good, we traded him for 2 expiring contracts.

Going after kidd? at that point who wouldnt want him, he was 2nd in MVP voting and he was even a better shooter back then.

Elson-cheap athletic big, and i believe we won a championship with him on the team.

Barbosa-now this is a fun one, passing up on barbosa, in retrospect looks pretty bad. passing on josh howard who was drafted one pick after ours probably looks worst, but you know what? we were coming off a championship and we wanted to add some firepower. Let me ask you this, who was more accomplished as a scorer Michael Finley, or some rookie named barbosa? another shrewd move imo, finleys age shows now but hes given us some nice moments in the clutch.

Splitter/Scola - This one hurts, we let scola go because we drafted splitter, and plus all those other reasons im sure we all know about.

to conclude my post, if you saying that the spurs havent made any big trades to acquire allstar level talent in the last 10 years is a bad move, then im saying that that is a HORRIBLE argument. We won 4 championships in the past 9 years, In those 9 years the spurs amassed the highest winning percentage in ALL major sports. I can't imagine you being a real spurs fan.

[ducks]

Apparently the Houston GM did.

no he did not
thought the deal was worth it anyhow

[Harry Callahan]

That's a cop out and an excuse. Other perennial playoff teams like Detroit and Houston seem to routinely find talent, despite their less-than-favorable drafting position. Detroit has literally transformed their bench overnight into one of the better benches in this league. That can only happen if you do not "throw away" draft picks, invest in scouting and make the right decisions.

We all know the draft is a crap shoot, which is why teams have to do their homework. For many years now the Spurs have carefully mined the international market, at the expense of the domestic market. Now, it's coming back to haunt them. With the influx of talent pouring into the drafts from various sources, a team can be successful, if it does it homework. So don't try and convince me that lower round picks are useless.

Look, the Euro drafting strategy was not a bad one. , it yielded Parker and Ginobili. It just should not have been the ONLY strategy. The strategy of adding experienced vets was also not a bad one. It yielded players like Kerr, Willis, Smith, Finley, et all. Again, it just should not have been the ONLY one. Adding at least 1 young player, even ever other year, would've helped fortify the bench to a point that perhaps this team would have had a more balanced roster. As has been pointed out, think what a boost the potential additions of a Josh Howard, a Luis Scola and even the development of Beno, would have made to this roster.

It's not a cop out and I never said lower picks are useless. Probably 80% of players picked after 20 don't become quality players. 4 out of 5 don't contribute much. Every team makes personnel mistakes.

When you have only four first round picks that you actually keep in ten years, it is difficult to have tremendous success with that few picks because some of them will not make it, I don't care who you are.

Take a closer look at Houston and Detroit (who do not "routinely find talent" as you say. The Rockets made nothing but bad drafting decisions from 1997 until 2002 when they drafted Yao (remember Eddie Griffin in 2001? - Look it up). They traded away lottery pick Rudy Gay (a possible star) for a decent role player Battier a couple of years ago. They traded for McGrady. Head and Landry are good draft picks.

Detroit has a couple two nice recent additions, but have the Spurs been drafting ahead of detroit to get Stucky or Maxiell? No they haven't. Please do not forget that the Pistons passed on D Wade, Anthony, and Bosh in 2003 for Darko. Did the Spurs have a #1 pick in 2003. No. The pistons let Okur go to Utah, too.

You have to have the opportunity to draft the right guy, and you don't hit on all players.

Parker, Beno, Ian, and Splitter are the only #1s SA has drafted in a decade because SA has traded picks for veteran players. With so few opportunities to even draft in the first round in the first place, it is TOTALLY unrealistic to pick four Tony Parkers with those four picks.

These are not cop outs or excuses. When the Spurs have drafted (at the 28th pick each time) they have actually drafted pretty well. All four of these guys have ability.

Hopefully, the #26 will yield a decent player who will play this year.

[Marcus Bryant]

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/amir_johnson/index.html

Sure, they had interest in Johnson last summer. With Splitter not coming in Mahinmi will be in the rotation next season.

Please make up your mind. You can't simultaneously make excuses for why Ian Mahinmi won't be ready to play championship basketball in '08-'09 and then claim him as a reason the Spurs should be able to contend for a championship in '08-'09.

You can't castigate the Spurs for not having young talent lined up and then ignore Mahinmi. Mahinmi will be raw but he certainly can be a contributor next season. Also, knocking the Spurs for not having that much young talent and then saying that young talent isn't good for winning a championship is a bit contradictory. Are the Spurs competing for the Most Ballas in the NBA award?

The Spurs aren't particularly adept at scouting domestic talent.

Sure. So draft for athleticism. At least you can keep Ginobili's minutes down during the regular season.

The free agent class is not good. They can't acquire players in free agency that aren't free agents.

There are quite a few useful and available players for the Spurs' needs.

That was five years ago. What they succeeded in doing then, they are failing to do now.

They've certainly regenerated the supporting cast over the last 5 years on the fly. What are they failing to do? It's June 6th.

The Spurs are old and the rest of the league has passed them by. They will be first- or second-round playoff fodder for the next two years before another possible contending run or two.

They passed all but 3 teams by this season.

[timvp]

I see being concerned about the Spurs but I just don't see where the 48-win-maybe-no-playoff talk is coming from. The Spurs were old ... but that was mostly by design. The Spurs didn't try to get younger last summer and failed. They tried to get as old and veteran as possible.

And even given their age, they were one healthy Manu ankle away from gas being put into the river boats. The Spurs didn't get it done but I don't see how they aren't going to improve.

Finley was a s of a basketball player. Whoever they bring in will be better. Anyone will produce better than Horry. You can't do worse than Vaughn. Then add those upgrades to a team that was close to winning championship number five and I don't see the problem.

And posters are saying the Spurs don't have assets ... I disagree. When was the last time the Spurs could use the entire MLE? This is the first time they'll use every drop of it in years. Add in a 25th pick, which is lower than usual, and two second round picks, the bi-annual LLE, a couple trade exceptions, a number of tradeable expired contracts, four or five roster spots to work with and no worries about going over the lux tax threshold for the first time since 2004 ....... and things are bad? Really?

As constructed this second, I agree the Spurs won't win the 2009 championship. But the Spurs have a ton of options this summer and as much ammo to get things done as they've had since the 2003 offseason.

And the compe ion is solid but not too impressive. The Lakers? Eh, Bynum will be an upgrade but Odom sucks at small forward, Gasol is more center than power forward, Fisher is their glue guy and he's almost ready to be sent to the glue factory and Kobe has more mileage than anyone on the Spurs. Everyone gets all flustered by their supposed awesome bench but their bench consists of Vujacic, Farmar, Walton and Turiaf. All pretty good players but far from the Dream Team that they are made out to be. Are any of those players even above average NBA contributors? PJax is a great coach and Kobe is a great player but honestly the Kobe and Shaq Lakers were about five times as intimidating. If the Spurs rid themselves of their old parts, add a hint of athleticism and stay healthy, I love their chances.

The Celtics are good but they are even older than the Spurs. Cassell and Brown make Horry and Finley look like youngsters. Detroit in the East is getting rebuilt. The Cavs are still a one-man team.

In the West you have the up-and-coming Hornets but Byron Scott usually alienates his team after a good playoff run or two. Plus a team built around four injury prone players likely won't have the planets align ever again where they will all be healthy. The Jazz are good but Boozer is declining and Kirilenko and Okur make them beatable. Portland is rising but they are still a couple years away from contending.

I just don't understand where the sense of total and complete doom is coming from. The Spurs have the means to get better and the parts that are leaving automatically make the team better. As always, it'll come down to health and the Spurs Big Three is pretty damn durable compared to the foundation other teams are built upon.

I was much more worried after 2006 than this summer. Even 2004 was bleaker. This is the brightest post playoff defeat summer since 2002.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

100% agreed.

[ducks]

I think the spurs could win it all next year
but it depends on alot of things
ian
draft
fa's
health

[Mr. Body]

And posters are saying the Spurs don't have assets ... I disagree. When was the last time the Spurs could use the entire MLE? This is the first time they'll use every drop of it in years.

Two years ago - split between Butler and Elson.

But disagree in part. Things are pretty lousy. There's a lot of revamping to do but not a lot available to do it with. They'll be a playoff team again next year.

[Marcus Bryant]

Lousy? They have their 3 stars set. All they have to do is fill in the supporting cast.

[timvp]

Two years ago - split between Butler and Elson.

It wasn't the whole MLE they split.

[Mr. Body]

OK. Even more evidence, perhaps -- you see them spending that kind of money on a single player?

[timvp]

OK. Even more evidence, perhaps -- you see them spending that kind of money on a single player?

Yes. There is no luxury tax concerns for the first time since 2004 so there's no reason not to spend every dime.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

OK. Even more evidence, perhaps -- you see them spending that kind of money on a single player?

I don't see the MLE being a big deal to spend, they're nowhere near the lux tax.

Spurs current salary commitments:

2008-2009: 53 million
2009-2010: 52 million
2010-2011: 32 million

And you're talking about the lux tax threshold, which has been the hard cap for the Spurs ownership group, being up at $70 million for the coming season.

Essentially, the Spurs have $17 million in wiggle room this summer, $18 million next year.

[Mr. Body]

Last question then -- can the MLE be for 2 years. Or, say, 3 years with team/player option after 2? How do they protect their 2010 cap?

[angelbelow]

Last question then -- can the MLE be for 2 years. Or, say, 3 years with team/player option after 2? How do they protect their 2010 cap?

youre posts in this thread have mainly been negative or/and overly critical. bare with us fans as we are all curious to see the changes that we all expect to be made this summer. if at the beginning of training camp our roster is the same, then we'll be negative together. until then have some faith in rc, pop, duncan, and the entire spurs family.

to answer youre question, the MLE could be used to sign a better for however long they want. team options, player options etc are all available.

[rascal]

a lot of these are justifable my man (unless youre a woman in which i apologize for calling you a man) but this is how it breaks down.

Steve Smith-we had ginobili coming up, we had stephen jackson coming up. unless youre talking about trading for him, because anderson wasnt going to beat out ginobili or sjax for playing time anyways.

Rasho-its true it was a mistake, but it was a calculated one, rasho was coming off a promising season 11 pts 1.5blks 6.5 rebs and he didnt do bad his first year here. 8.7pts, 2 blks, 7.7rebs. besides as soon as we realized he was no good, we traded him for 2 expiring contracts.

Going after kidd? at that point who wouldnt want him, he was 2nd in MVP voting and he was even a better shooter back then.

Elson-cheap athletic big, and i believe we won a championship with him on the team.

Barbosa-now this is a fun one, passing up on barbosa, in retrospect looks pretty bad. passing on josh howard who was drafted one pick after ours probably looks worst, but you know what? we were coming off a championship and we wanted to add some firepower. Let me ask you this, who was more accomplished as a scorer Michael Finley, or some rookie named barbosa? another shrewd move imo, finleys age shows now but hes given us some nice moments in the clutch.

Splitter/Scola - This one hurts, we let scola go because we drafted splitter, and plus all those other reasons im sure we all know about.

to conclude my post, if you saying that the spurs havent made any big trades to acquire allstar level talent in the last 10 years is a bad move, then im saying that that is a HORRIBLE argument. We won 4 championships in the past 9 years, In those 9 years the spurs amassed the highest winning percentage in ALL major sports. I can't imagine you being a real spurs fan.

Steve Smith was suppose to be the big backcourt scorer when they got him and ended up a bench player. He was clearly on the decline thats why he was being shopped by Portland. The spurs thought they were getting a better player then what he turned out to be. Sprewell would have been a better option at that time. They miscalculated Smiths value and did not realize he was way past his best years.

Rasho was the big free agent signing the team waited 3 years on. Nothing more than a role player cailber type of player. That was the year they were suppose to get a max all star and went after Kidd. Kidd was not a good fit anyways since they already had an up and coming future star in Parker. J O'Neal would have been the better target.

9 points 8 rebounds from Rasho is not what you get when you plan all your moves for 3 years around getting a max star as a free agent signing.

The whole max free agent plan was a failure.

Elson was not a very good pickup and the faster they got rid of him the better. They won despite him.

Bonner, why did they bother extending him if he isn't good enough to play in the playoffs?

Scola/Splitter Got nothing of value back in the Scola trade. Decided to keep bonner instead. Splitter looks to also be a wasted foreign pick. You think they would have been more sure that a guy would come over and play after what happened with Scola.

Steven Jackson They did not want to pay him after he proved he could hit big shots in the playoffs and instead let him walk.

Barbosa and J Howard They did not recognize these guys would turn into very good players and let them slip away. They could have had either with just a late round draft pick.

Yes in 10 years the spurs have not gotten any really good players through trade. Many players have switched teams through trade during that time and many players went for cheap in return. what was wrong with trying to get R Wallace when Portland was giving him away or targeting a young sf like Caron Butler when his value was not high? Or getting Sprewell when GS wanted to get rid of him. The spurs could have had more les with sprewell in the backcourt instead of S Smith. A good front office lands players through trades.

This is about player acquisistions that Po/RC have made not on the les they won. But if you want to talk about les, Duncans greatness has covered up a very inadequate front office. Shaq and Duncan have been the two most dominate big men in the game over the last 10 years. Those type of dominate post players have historically won les.

They won 2 les not so much by their moves but by having two dominate post players in Robinson and Duncan when most teams did not even have one good one and the other two with two great low round draft picks that panned out and Duncan in his prime and no other dominate team during that time.

[Mr. Body]

youre posts in this thread have mainly been negative or/and overly critical. bare with us fans as we are all curious to see the changes that we all expect to be made this summer. if at the beginning of training camp our roster is the same, then we'll be negative together. until then have some faith in rc, pop, duncan, and the entire spurs family.

to answer youre question, the MLE could be used to sign a better for however long they want. team options, player options etc are all available.

Thanks for the well-wishing, but you didn't really answer the question.

What are the technical requirements for the MLE? I believe there is a minimum number of years it must be signed for.

[JamStone]

You can go team by team in the NBA, or even in any of the major team sports, and you will find several mistakes by management regardless of the success of each team. Mistakes in the draft happen all the time, with every team, from the #1 draft pick to late second round picks. It's been said so much, but the cliche is true that the draft is not an exact science. NBA GMs and scouts cannot predict in absolute how a player will develop his skills, how mentally tough he is or can become, how injury proof he will be throughout his career.

Of course you can criticize the Spurs for some of their draft maneuvering since the Tony Parker draft pick, but you can do that with every single NBA team over a period of time.

Likewise, making the right moves with free agency and trades is also not a sure-fire process. First of all, you can target the best players for free agency and trade, but it's always at least a two-way street, sometimes a three-way street. The player has to want to join the team at the price the team can afford when it comes to free agency. With trades, not only should there be player interest, but the willingness of the other team to make a deal with the pieces you are willing to trade. It's not always an easy task.

All that said, one can definitely criticize the Spurs management for not being more proactive in replenishing the team during their championship run with some youth and athleticism. They did wait too long. The process should have begun in the summer of 2005. In fairness, they tried with the draft of Ian Mahinmi. But, their other moves that summer can be questioned to a certain degree. With already an aging bench and role players like Bowen, Barry, and Horry, they went out and added Finley, Van Exel, and Oberto. That was the summer they probably should have targeted younger, more athletic role players. They did the following year with Jackie Butler and James White, but with as little money as possible, the very cheap they could go to get youth and athleticism.

Criticism is fair because in the business of professional sports, even great teams and organizations must strive to continue to get better. In some ways, the Spurs have appeared like they are trying to hold on for dear life as long as they can, instead of proactively trying to replenish the roster.

You cannot argue with the success of the Spurs, but you can question how they have been able to re-tool during this championship run. It's possible they can make 2-3 strong moves in free agency and in the draft and maybe push to extend their success. But, right now, it's questionable at best. The league is getting younger and better. And, the Spurs currently have several needs to address.

[JamStone]

Last question then -- can the MLE be for 2 years. Or, say, 3 years with team/player option after 2? How do they protect their 2010 cap?

I'm under the impression that the MLE can be for 1 year if both sides agree.

Not completely sure, but I'm pretty sure the MLE is like any other contract offer. It can be between 1-6 years in length.

[NewJerSpur]

I was much more worried after 2006 than this summer. Even 2004 was bleaker. This is the brightest post playoff defeat summer since 2002.

Agreed, especially in terms of the 2006 Dallas team. It seemed as if they'd finally "put it together" so to speak (meaning they realized that there is more to the game than just scoring). They had a nice blend of youngs and vets and Avery scared them into playing harder in every aspect of the game. They torched the Spurs in transition and had even more free reign in the middle of the lane than N.O. this past postseason. Diop had the ability to frustrate TD and Harris wore Tony out on the defensive end with his quickness and that mid-ranged jumper he developed. Terry seemed to be the missing link that finally gave the team a real closer as well as some heart and fire. Oh, and their offense never slept because the bench was equipped to score as well.

-The Lakers outplayed the Spurs without Bynum, but I'd still hesitate to call them the "better" team overall....maybe the better word would be "fresher".

-N.O. could become the next Pheonix Suns: Equipped with the best PG in the league and possible future MVP and "all the right weapons" yet unable to summon the mental toughness to win on the big stage. They botched a prime opportunity this year and they are only guaranteed a high level of production from about 3 of their players next season.

-Houston....will they ever get over their injury issues before T. Mac eventually moves on?

-Pheonix: Remains to be seen what a new coach can bring to the table, but the team has a loser's mentality when facing the Spurs in critical situations, and the 1st round of this postseason didn't help matters much.

-Utah: Still doesn't have a real post threat or lane clogger that can take pressure off of Boozer...this in a conference where size is now at a premium.

-Blazers: Mighty young...mighty young indeed.

-Dallas now: Back to playing "shaky" to "no" defense....that trade has messed them up for some time to come even if the series ramifications of it aren't seen for a few seasons. They should still make the playoffsa though.

Going back to my original point (or rather Timvp's point) there have been bleaker situations and longer championship droughts, yet the team has continued to move forward. Time to learn from any past mistakes and see what unforseen cogs can be brought in and developed to aid the system. I think Ime and KT are good building blocks.